Last week
we had the privilege of taking the 2012 Ford Focus "5-door" hatchback (four passenger doors and a back hatch/door) for a spin.
We came away generally impressed by the vehicle itself, but pretty
disappointed in the second generation SYNC system (but not necessarily for the
same reasons others have stated).

Read on to find out what it's like to drive Ford Motor Company's (F) newest compact.

I. Looks, Feel, and Price

The 2012 Focus has a starting MSRP of $16,720 for a 4-door sedan or $18,065 for
a 5-door hatchback sedan. There are seven different price grades -- four
four-door sedan trim levels, and three hatchback trim levels.

We received the 5-door Titanium trim model to test -- which happens to be the
priciest base model at $22,765 MSRP.

How you feel about the vehicle's looks depends largely on how you feel about
European design versus a more traditional American sedan styling. Like
the Ford Fiesta, the European styling is readily apparent with sweeping, aggressive
curves.

We liked the look of the exterior, especially the front grill region and subtle
side curves to the door panel. It also looks pretty good from the back.

Inside, the doors, sports-style seats, and front console all looked and felt
great. The molding on the front console was superb. The one weak
point, we felt was the center stack, whose molding looked and felt somewhat
like cheap plastic.

Our favorite part of the interior design was the steering wheel itself.
The turn signal and wiper blades stalks curve upwards and then down on
subtle slope in the shape somewhat akin to a bird in flight. Combined with the
design of the wheel itself the results are not only attractive, but offer easy
hand access to the controls.

The driver and passenger's front seats were both spacious with an acceptable,
but not overabundant amount of cargo room in the door compartments, center
compartment, and glove box. Additional front panel storage in the center
section would be a nice touch, but for this class the storage seemed
sufficient.

The rear was also relatively spacious for a compact, but the center console
(which as we said, we weren't much of a fan of in the first place) rears its
ugly head again, intruding in the rear passengers' legroom. The effect
seems subtle at first, but on long rides -- especially with adult passengers --
it's definitely noticeable.

Overall: A-

II. How Does it Drive?

I took the Ford Focus on several excursions including a highway trip where I
tested speeds, a groceries trip, and a road trip out into the countryside.
In all cases the car performed admirably.

On the highway I briefly tested the Select Shift. Basically Select Shift is
an automated manual technology (which many carmakers have) that electronically
shifts gears without user interaction from a clutch pedal. The electronic
clutching system is designed to give users a bit more of a "sporty"
feel than they would in a traditional automatic, by giving them control of the
electronic gear shifting.

Testing the system, it indeed seemed to give me more torque when revving the
engine after shifting down to "fourth". Throwing fuel
efficiency to the wind I found that the car was more than capable of strongly
accelerating if you play with it a bit via the select shifter.

The SelectShift is definitely a welcome feature. Aside from offering
improved acceleration it also could come in handy when climbing steep slopes
(shift down to a lower gear). The only disappointment here is that Ford
chose to implement it with flimsy seeming plastic buttons on the center stick,
rather than paddles like some of its other models.

When ignoring the semi-manual capabilities, acceleration is a bit on the weak
side, but the general power of 2.0 liter I-4 engine is sufficient given the
lighter vehicle weight.

Handling is one of the car's real strengths. It felt great rounding
corners. Ford uses a technology called "torque vectoring
control" that changes the wheel speeds individually to optimally handle
cornering. Again, this technology isn't exactly brand new, but Ford does
a solid job implementing it here in a mass-market vehicle.

The car also showed its colors in offering great dampening to noise, vibration,
and harshness (NVH). As opposed to the Fiesta, which I tested last year,
the NVH has been scaled down even more. The result is that the car feels
a little less sporty as you feel less of the road. But it's hard to
complain about a silky smooth ride. Ford deserves a lot of credit for
making a silent cabin and a strong suspension that can offer a relatively
smooth trek down even the most pothole-laden city streets and dirt country
roads.

Gas mileage is generally quite good. It hits its sweet spot at around
50-60 mph. Trying to stick largely to that speed band, we managed to
average 31.2 mpg over the week. This is nicely in line with the EPA
rating of ratings of 27 mpg city/37 mpg highway, so no major surprises positive
or negative here.

The strong mileage is owed in part to several high-tech features. The car
closes its grille on the highway to improve its aerodynamics. And the
engine itself is equipped with direct injection technology. Together,
these and several other technologies mean that you'll get surprisingly far on a
tank, considering your driving a vehicle with a pure gas engine.

In all the Ford Focus is a very comfortable drive. It toes the line of
being a bit sporty. The new technologies it brings to the table (torque
vectoring, SelectShift, etc.) offer the chance to have a bit more fun with the
vehicle when you're in an experimental mood. And when it comes to fuel
economy -- an important concern in today's market of $4 gas, the Focus is a
strong performer, hitting north of 30 mpg for the average driver.

Overall: A

III. Controls and Sync Gen 2.0

i. Voice Control? What Voice Control?

(See the update at the end of this piece for an important clarification.)

I'll try to be brief on what I feel is the Ford Focus's greatest
weakness/frustration, MyFord Touch (also known as Ford Sync Gen 2.0).

I think that a lot of what has been reported about the system by other news
agencies (Consumer Reports) is somewhat misleading. Many have
argued that the system is overly complex. From a touch perspective I
respectfully disagree -- the system is relatively intuitive, and everything is
a couple clicks away at most.

So what's wrong with Sync Gen 2.0, then? At the heart of the problem is a
noticeably deteriorated voice recognition system.
"Deteriorated?" you ask. Indeed, the voice recognition is
noticeably worse than in the first generation.

The system failed to recognize approximately 40-50 percent of the voice
commands that I gave it, in cases when I was giving it exactly the correct
command. I would estimate the failure rate for Sync Gen 1.0 to be closer
to 10-20 percent, hence how noticeable this was.

It had an especially hard time dealing with short words. For example
requesting 88.3 (a radio station) took about five or six tries.
Requesting that my synced Bluetooth handset "call mom" simply
did not work -- I tried about ten times. I was only able to get it to
call the number by manually punching it in the touch screen, at which point the
voice command system announced "calling mom". I called other
people using the "call ___" command so it was clearly the voice
recognition system that was flawed.

Along with the voice recognition came frustrating slowdown issues. A busy
signal became an all too familiar site when it was struggling to translate my
voice commands. Sometimes the system seemed to just crash, giving some
sort of error about a command failing and no voice cue (the standard cue is to
ask "Did you say, "____"?").

To me this slowdown was somewhat baffling. After all, the Sync Gen 2.0 is
equipped with a 600 MHz ARM processor that's 50 percent faster than the Gen
1.0's processor. And the system has a 2D/3D graphics accelerator to handle
the onscreen images, and is equipped with 512 MB of RAM. In other words,
the hardware seems sound.

ii. Our Ford Source Spills the Beans on What Went Wrong

Trying to get to the bottom of from whence the slowdown and voice control
issues came, I spoke with one of my sources on the Sync team. They said
that the issues with the system were well known in the group and to bear in
mind that the system I received was several updates since the original release
so was actually significantly improved.

They told me that at the root of the problem was that Ford decided to largely
scrap their own codebase and hire BSQUARE Corp (BSQR) to recode the next generation of Sync. The move seemingly made sense.
Ford already had a close partnership with Microsoft Corp. and BSQUARE was
a company founded by ex-Microsoft employees with close ties to their former
employer.

But the results Ford received were poor. Our source described BSQUARE's
coding process as "Guy A sitting in room 1 writing code and guy B sitting
in room 2 also writing code, with neither knowing what the other is
doing."

Our source said that at the end of the day the resulting app was bloated and
inefficient.

"Who would you say is to blame?" I asked. They replied,
"I'd say 70 percent BSQUARE, but 30 percent Ford for choosing
BSQUARE."

So that's the dirty little secret behind MyFord Touch and its issues.

Oh, and according to my source the recent rebooting problems (which I
fortunately did not experience) were not nearly as "rare" as Ford's
spokesperson described them as. They said that the recent update did
significantly decrease the rate of reboots, but that it still was occurring.

They also complained that because the updates could only be installed at the
dealership, many people were still driving on the road with older versions (and
would hence get more reboots). They argued that it would have been wise
to incorporate a 3G modem for over the air updates -- something Ford discussed,
but decided was too expensive at present.

They did point out that the reboot issue wasn't entirely new -- Ford Sync Gen
1.0 in earlier versions also sometimes rebooted. But rather than going
black, the screen would simply throw up a message about that it was "re-indexing"
files/assets.

iii. Final Thoughts on Sync Including a Bit of Good

So that's not my only gripes about Sync. Aside from the underlying
slowdown/voice recognition issues, I was also frustrated by certain commands
that were seemingly missing. For example you had to hard press the phone
button (on the steering wheel) to hang up calls -- there was no voice command
to do that (though there were commands to make a call, pause a call, join a
call, etc.). Also there was no way I could find to individually
separately tweak the passenger and driver cabin temperatures using voice
commands.

Other commands struck me as irritating such as "make it hotter" to
increase the temperature. Why the system could not just be designed to
respond to "increase temperature" or "temperature up" for
the life of me I don't know.

A final (negative) point to make is that while you could certainly use the
steering button controls or touch screen to access most of the
missing/problematic voice commands, doing so while driving is very unsafe.
In my experience the distraction of doing so eclipses that of making a
call on a handset. It's approximately as distracting as surfing the
internet on a smartphone or texting while driving.

Ford's voice recognition system was designed to cut down on taking the
driver’s hands and eyes off the road. However, the voice recognition is so bad
that it fails at this mission.
There were a few aspects of Sync Gen 2.0 I liked. When stopped, I found
the new touch interface to be attractive, intuitive, and simple. Also
commands to play music actually seemed to be the one area where voice
recognition had remained constant in quality or perhaps improved slightly.
And while the climate controlled had some frustrations
(missing/frustratingly worded commands and voice recognition issues), I liked
the overall ability to control the cabin climate by voice.

I also liked that the Ford Focus included the "European" style physical audio and climate control panel as a backup to the touch screen. Once I
familiarized myself with it, I regularly circumvented Sync and safely adjusted
the radio and cabin climate (e.g. temperature and fan speed) by turning the traditional panel's knobs and pressing its buttons.
Compared to the frustrations/dangers of using the touch screen or voice
driven climate control while driving, I came to develop a health appreciation
of classic tactile controls.

Ford should definitely include a backup audio and climate controls set like it did with
Focus for any model that comes with Sync Gen 2.0. This was a terrific
decision and mitigates the damage from the sloppy Sync Gen 2.0.

To summarize, when Sync Gen 2.0 worked, I really liked it. But when it
failed it drove me crazy. Based on the perspective I gained from my
discussion with one of my Sync Team sources it seems Ford has some internal
issues that are derailing the quality of the project. It seems like Ford
sold the horse (voice control) to save the farm (add a pretty touch interface)
and at the end of the day the results aren't pretty.

That said, from what I've heard there's been significant progress from the
updates to the system. So there's still hope that Ford can
"fix" the broken core code that BSQUARE delivered to the Sync team
for integration.

Until then, I would expect the pickup rate to remain low. According to a dealership source, the current pickup rate was internally stated to be around 20
percent. That's much lower than Sync Gen 1.0. You can get Sync Gen
1.0 in the Focus, according to my source.

Refer to my comments on Sync Gen 1.0 to make your impressions on that.
But to offer you a brief summary, I love Gen 1.0 and thought it offers a
truly unprecedented experience.

Overall: C-

IV. Conclusions

For all my complaints about Sync Gen 2.0, it still is well ahead of the
competition in what it can do in a single package. It may be frustrating,
but you can adjust to it with time (I had started to by the end of the week) or
you can simply opt to go with Ford Sync Gen 1.0.

This single issue is not enough to seriously bring down what is a great car in
my professional opinion.

For its class, the vehicle drives great, gets terrific gas mileage, and has a smooth ride.
It also looks great, both inside and out.

It has plenty of nice features like physical climate controls and SelectShift
that allow you to do pretty much anything you might want/need to do while
driving.

Overall, I would heartily recommend the 2012 Ford Focus. As a sum of its
parts, it's a very likable car and would make the ideal grocery
getter-cum-commuting vehicle.

Overall: A-

Updated: Monday May 2, 2011 1:10 p.m.

We just finished talking with Ford's spokesperson about our MyFord Touch difficulties. He tells us that the vehicle had a pre-production software, which may be the source of some of the voice issues.

As all the branches of the MyFord Touch code tree are at a bit different stages of updates, it's hard to equate exactly how far "outdated" the in-vehicle code was, but it sounds like it's received substantial tweaks since, which may have improved performance.

An upcoming update will unify all these development trees into a single homogeneous source, but until then it's easiest just to say the tested build was pre-production.

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

quote: Ummm, perhaps I read the article wrong, but it sounds like Sync 2.0 isn't microsoft. So, whether or not anything "Microsucks" is involved in is terrible is totally irrelevant, because they're not involved. Actually, it sounds like when they WERE involved, it was much much better. Which would actually refute your claim. Interesting . . .

Not exactly, but you were closer to the truth that the original op.

Microsoft made the underlying OS for Sync Gen 1 and 2. From all my sources I've spoken to that OS is terrific for the job and worked well for both versions.

The real success or failure of the system boiled down to the quality of the APPLICATION running on the OS.

In gen. 1 Ford coded this app and integrated it into the final hardware/os/app package. For gen. 2 Ford ditched its old codebase and hired BSQUARE (a company founded by ex-Microsofters) to make the app. Ford provided the overall design direction and part of the integration duties.

Like my source said, the problem mostly lies with BSQUARE, who did a poor job in coding the APP (note this is NOT the same as the operating system).

According to my source Microsoft is entirely NOT to blame for the issues. My primary Sync team source actually told me they felt bad for Microsoft as this is reflecting negatively on them when they made a solid OS and did nothing wrong.

The source said the same is true for Nuance -- who made the speech recognition APIs (they also make the Dragon speech-to-text software for PCs).

quote: As I said, there's still hope that Ford will optimize the app/improve the experience and make it worthwhile in later versions.

Interesting, I've used the MyFord in the Edge and last weekend when I tested the Focus. Loved it in both vehicles! I did not experience any reboots or problems with the voice recognition but the test drive was limited (about an hour on each vehicle). Regardless, I'm still a year out on purchasing so hopefully Ford gets the problems fixed in the next year.

Under the right conditions, outsourcing can work. Mainly when your company is substantially less experienced in the task than the company you're outsourcing to.

Where Ford goofed here was in outsourcing something that was critical to them, but not to the company doing the work. When Boeing outsources the manufacture of a wing, the contract is big enough that the company they outsource to is highly committed to getting that wing made to spec and delivered on time in the interest of future business. If BSquare only had two programmers working on this, clearly they considered it to be a nonessential, even negligible contract.

The quality of work will reflect how important it is to the company doing it. Something all managers should keep in mind when making decisions about outsourcing, particularly when choosing between big or little companies to do the outsourced work. Apple ran into this with the PowerPC architecture. Since Apple represented a minority of IBM's PowerPC sales, their desires and concerns about its power consumption in their laptops fell on deaf ears at IBM. Going with the big name is not always the safer decision.

Thank you for the insights. I sold Fords from 2006-2008. Ford had voice response for the navigation system in some Expeditions even before 2006 (IIRC). As a salesperson, I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to experiment with one of those early systems after I had been trained on Sync 1. From the experiences it seemed to me that Ford had continued with that code, which is consistent with what you said.

I also had the opportunity to briefly test the voice response in an early, 2009 model Chrysler Routan (Chrysler Town and Country with VW modified suspension and other features). It was pathetic. The voice recognition and response was totally useless. If you are going to buy a vehicle for voice response, you should test the voice recognition and response thoroughly first.

I am in no position to buy a vehicle now. I would like it to have a voice response system at least as good and functional as Sync 1. When driving, I would really like to keep my eyes on the road while I listen to SMS and short emails and compose responses.

Please keep updating this information so we can learn when Sync 2 equals and then surpasses Sync 1.